Johnson v. St. Louis, Kansas City & Northern Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 31 October 1882 |
| Citation | 76 Mo. 553 |
| Parties | JOHNSON v. THE ST. LOUIS, KANSAS CITY & NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court.--HON. GEORGE W. DUNN, Judge.
REVERSED.
Wells H. Blodgett for appellant.
This suit was originally instituted before a justice of the peace upon the following statement:
This is not an action at common law, as it is not based upon any alleged negligence of the defendant in running its trains, nor is it a suit under the 5th section of the damage act, (R. S., § 2124,) as fences are not by that section required to be constructed, ( Edwards v. R. R. Co., 66 Mo. 567;) but it is plainly an attempt to state a cause of action under the 43rd section of the railroad corporation act, (R. S., § 809,) as that is the only statute which requires fences to be constructed.
As a statement of a cause of action under that section, it is fatally defective, in failing to allege that the cow got upon the track of the defendant, and was injured or killed, as the case may be, in consequence of the failure of the defendant to erect and maintain fences where, by law, it was required to erect and maintain them. Luckie v. R. R. Co., 67 Mo. 245; Sloan v. R. R. Co., 74 Mo. 48; Bates v. R. R. Co., 74 Mo. 60. As the insufficiency of the statement necessitates a reversal of the judgment, we need not examine the testimony, which the defendant contends, utterly fails to show that the plaintiff's cow was injured on the defendant's road. Judgment reversed.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McIntosh v. Hannibal & St. J. R. Co.
...Parrish v. Railroad, 63 Mo. 284; Sloan v. Railroad, 74 Mo. 47; Bates v. Railroad, 74 Mo. 60; Rowland v. Railroad, 73 Mo. 619; Johnson v. Railroad, 76 Mo. 553; Hudgens v. Railroad, 79 Mo. 418; Nance Railroad, 79 Mo. 196; Manz v. Railroad, 2 West. Rep. 472. II. There was an entire failure of ......
-
Moore v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Ry. Co.
...track at a point where there was no fence, as required by law, and was there killed in consequence of such failure to fence. Johnson v. Railroad Co., 76 Mo. 553; Nance v. Railroad Co., 79 Mo. 196. The admission of parol testimony to show that the townships of Benton and Grand River in Davie......
-
Jantzen v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Ry. Co.
...v. H. & St. J. Ry., 70 Mo. 202; Sloan v. Mo. Pacific Ry., 74 Mo. 48; Bates v. St. L., I. M. & S. Ry., 74 Mo. 60; Johnson v. St. L., K. C. & N. Ry., 76 Mo. 553. (2) There was a complete failure of proof in this case. It was not shown by the evidence where the animal got upon defendant's trac......
-
Polhans v. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad Company
... ... ... Certified from the St. Louis Court of Appeals ... ... Affirmed ... the very gist and essence of the transaction. Johnson v ... Railroad, 76 Mo. 553; Melvin v. Railroad, 89 ... of Clemings v. Railroad, decided by the Kansas City ... court of appeals (21 Mo.App. 606), the case was ... ...